The House Republicans have cooked up a bill to empower states with unencumbered control over federal funds. It is called HR 610. In DC, they refer to the principle of the bill as”block grants.” Otherwise known as send the money without strings so the states can do what they want. An earlier post by Denis Smith explained that federal funds without oversight leads to waste, fraud, and abuse.
Laura Chapman explains more here:
“HR 610 has the Arne Duncan trick of requiring a change in state law if vouchers are not on the books. So the new national system must be voucher-compliant or no federal funds will be available. Federal funds to states are in the range of 8% to 12%, average about 10%. Given that many states have already cut their state budgets for education, and most are in Republican hands, this law is likely to pass. Notice that the same bill invites a lot of junk food contractors to get in the game of providing food to all children.
“Some key passages in the bill.
“From these amounts, each LEA shall: (1) distribute a portion of funds to parents who elect to enroll their child in a private school or to home-school their child, and (2) do so in a manner that ensures that such payments will be used for appropriate educational expenses.
“To be eligible to receive a block grant, a state must: (1) comply with education voucher program requirements, and (2) make it lawful for parents of an eligible child to elect to enroll their child in any public or private elementary or secondary school in the state or to home-school their child.”
“This is part of the same bill.
“No Hungry Kids Act
“The bill repeals a specified rule that established certain nutrition standards for the national school lunch and breakfast programs. (In general, the rule requires schools to increase the availability of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low-fat or fat free milk in school meals; reduce the levels of sodium, saturated fat, and trans fat in school meals; and meet children’s nutritional needs within their caloric requirements.)”
“Notice that money goes to states, then to local districts where the administrative burden for distributing money is located with no state oversight or consideration of how districts can make sure that payments to parents “will be used for appropriate educational expenses.” Follow them to Walmart? to Target? to Staples? This is a ridiculous bill. It is legislation from Republicans who want to create chaos.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.” – Calvin Coolidge, Republican.
This legislation, is probably dead on arrival.
It will defineflty pass.
But the patient usually gets better once he/she hits rock bottom and makes some lifestyle changes, speaking metaphorically.
I thought 610 was stalled. Is it already moving again?
I thought it was stalled too. But it is not dead. Still moving.
The federal government has been sending money to the states in the form of block grants, since the Lyndon Johnson administration. see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Block_grant
The theory is that the states are closer to the people, and thus more attuned to the needs of the people, than federal bureaucrats. Richard Nixon, also developed the concept of “revenue sharing”, sending federal money to the states, with little or no strings attached.
The Dept of Education has distributed federal money to the states, for many years, and even before that, when education was under the old Department of Health, Education, and welfare.
There is nothing inherently wrong with the feds sending money to the states, in the form of block grants. The fact is, that the states can (generally) disburse the funds in a more appropriate manner, than the feds, and often with lower administrative costs, so that more of the money gets spent on the issue, and less is lost in admin costs.
Wrong, Charles.
Title 1 is not a block grant. It is categorical funding that can be spent only on poor kids.
Special education funding is categorical, not a block grant.
There are many other categorical programs, developed for a specific purpose or population.
If block grants already existed, why would Repunlicans seek to change the law to create them?
Open Letter to
Kimberley Harrington,
Acting Commissioner of Education
State of New Jersey
March 10, 2017
Dear Ms. Harrington,
You are making nearly all third graders in the state of New Jersey take the PARCC test on a computer knowing scores would measure more accurately, and very likely be substantially higher if the test were administered with pencil and paper. Many reputable articles in professional publications substantiate this. My son is in third grade. I am both a concerned father and an educator. Why would you not want New Jersey students to achieve the highest scores possible? PARCC assessment tests the knowledge students acquire from their teacher, not adeptness using a computer – or am I missing something? Your insistence the PARCC be administered on a computer not only likely negatively impacts scores, but also potentially reflects negatively on a teacher’s evaluation as 30% is based on PARCC scores.
I would like to understand more about your logic behind this mandate. Schools unfortunately have cast aside handwriting instruction and other important developmental skills to make room for PARCC. Why then insist the PARCC be administered on computer?
Many parents across New Jersey are anxious to hear your detailed reasoning on this matter.
David Di Gregorio
Father, Englewood Cliffs
David,
I don’t believe what you are posing here is relevant to the discussion, but I will back you up by saying the computerized tests especially for younger children are not appropriate. In addition, pen and paper tests should be given to childrenof all ages and families who opt for them because they may fit the learning style of the child.
I’m with you on this 150%.
ddigregorio, I so agree (as a NY’an). As to relevance to topic, it’s a toss-up. On the one hand, block grants are sold as a corrective to fed over-reach– would we have had PARCC & 3rd-graders doing it on computer w/o that? Maybe not… but then again, Christie would probably have come around to it on his own thanx to Chris Cerf et al deformers he surrounded himself w/. And all the parent outcry & Dem legislators can’t seem to take it away.
Everything I read about how some states use block grants to fill budget holes on tangentially related or not even related ways flies against what you’re saying about “appropriate manner”.
I want my tax dollars to at least go toward the stated reasons – even if I disagree with the reasons/purpose… there should at least be consistency and transparency. That doesn’t seem to happen in practice.
I was speaking in the general sense. The Feds have sent money to the states in the form of block grants, for many different types of programs.
Q According to the General Accounting Office, from 1980 to 2001, the number of federal block grant programs went from 450 to 700. The grants are aimed at a wide range of activities from education to healthcare, transportation, housing and counterterrorism. END Q
Of course, there are categorical programs, no dispute.
Charles, most federal education money is designated as categorical programs, not block grants. The largest amounts of money are designated for poor children and special education. Republicans want to remove the designations and make them available for choice programs for anyone.
I’m very concerned about what will happen to special education, which I’ve heard is already stretched on funding.
Senator Toomey sent me a letter stating:
“Secretary DeVos is dedicated to enforcing the rights of students with disabilities and giving them the best education possible-including giving their parents the freedom to choose the best school or environment to help their children thrive. Secretary DeVos has also stated that she will direct the Department of Education to fund research on evidence-based practices that best aid in educating students with disabilities.
Like Secretary DeVos, I have long been a supporter of education reforms that allow parents to choose the schools their children attend. No one cares more about a child, or knows a child better, than the child’s parents. Giving parents the ability to choose the best school for their children can only help children achieve their potential.”
I’m not convinced he can speak so confidently about Secretary Devos’s dedication. And I’m not at all sure it’s the best course of our society to require parents, some with disabilities themselves, and poor working class busy parents, to have to become experts on early childhood education enough to be able to spend hours researching to figure out what’s the best environment for their child. Caring is one thing, having to become an expert on every issue to be a smart shopper for every move we make is unreasonable, and flies in the face of the whole point to a civilization and economy of scale.
Why can’t we just have all schools measure up to be high quality schools for a variety of student needs?
This is interesting. More than 90% of education spending (k-12) level is state/municipal. I am glad that the feds can provide support for special needs children. I would love to see more funding and resources go to gifted/talented. Sadly, there is not much political support for the educational needs of gifted/talented.
I believe it is possible for the feds to provide financial support for the lower-income family children and the special needs children, and also provide some block grant funding for school choice. These two goals are not mutually exclusive. There is no reason to believe that the special needs programs must be “robbed” to come up with the seed money for additional school choice.
You are referring to Community Development Block Grants which are quite a different animal from the block grants being proposed for health care and education. CDBGs were designed to be seed money for mostly urban communities to develop innovative projects and programs to revitalize their cities with locally developed ideas. This seed money was intended to be limited and encourage the cities to come up with their own funding mechanisms—taxes, public private partnerships, user fees—to maintain the programs and projects over the long term.
In the proposals pushed by Republicans, the block grants are being applied to program for which the amount that may be needed to fulfill their functions is unknown and very likely to be much larger than the amount they cover. For example, it cannot be accurately predicted how much disease and disability will occur in the coming year, nor for whom. They try to apply block grants to individuals with changing needs, something that is quite the opposite of CDBGs.
That’s a very good explanation of the points. Thank you for taking the time to explain that.
Well this will mean that families with 3 kids in school can get an average of 2500 or more per child per month. They could live off that and stay at home to provide homeschooling. Just thinking out loud.
“. . . make it lawful for parents of an eligible child to elect to enroll their child in any public or private elementary or secondary school in the state or to home-school their child.”
What defines “eligible” in this day and age of xenophobia? Immigrant children with undocumented parents? Children born here with undocumented parents?
For decades, the federal government has been distributing block grants to states for early childhood education/child development (ECE/CD) programs, including for private preschools and child care centers.
When I was the director of private for-profit and non-profit ECE/CD programs, including one that was religious, the families in our programs were eligible for government subsidies that helped pay for their children’s enrollment, as well as for the School Lunch program, provided we met non-discrimination requirements for serving families and employing staff, and at least 25% of our families were low income, which we did comply with.
You’re right about the lack of regulatory oversight at the state level though. I had to regularly sign off on government forms attesting to our compliance, but I don’t recall any government official ever coming out to verify that. We were exempt from licensing requirements due to our religious affiliation, but we chose to be licensed (and NAEYC accredited) anyways, so the city and state did come out, but not about meeting anti-discrimination requirements.
What’s the government going to do about the discrimination issue now, especially for the religious programs that won’t agree to not discriminate? In many states, private K-12 schools are not regulated at all, but also, there are loopholes for private religious schools regarding religious discrimination. Could that be one of the reasons why this administration wants to shut down the office of civil rights in the federal DoE?
BTW, according to the US Department of Education’s web page below, it’s the Department of Justice that handles religious discrimination in schools, and the US Department of Ed only addresses religious discrimination when that’s commingled with other discrimination issues, such as race or ethnicity. So, with a boatload of federal money about to go to unregulated private and parochial schools, if anything, I think the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Ed should increase it’s role in regard to regulatory oversight of discrimination in schools:
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/religious-rights2004.html
Homeless, it will be a miracle if there is any civil rights enforcement at all for the next four years. Or if the Office of Civil Rights in the U.S. ED survives budget cuts.
This bill was introduced by Steve King, who just yesterday tweeted that “We can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies”… which, so far, no GOP elected official has spoken out against…
The chair of the GOP in Iowa spoke out against it…that’s all I’ve heard so far.
David Duke weighed in: he agrees with Rep. King… I’m waiting for House Speaker Ryan and Senate GOP leader McConnell to react… and I am interpreting their silence as assent…
You won’t believe this one – oh, wait, I’m sure you will!!!!
http://www.post-gazette.com/business/pittsburgh-company-news/2017/03/13/Len-Boselovic-s-Heard-off-the-Street-John-Kasich-s-unreal-world-of-education/stories/201703120023
[http://www.post-gazette.com/image/2016/12/07/720x_q90_cMC_z_ca518,164,4586,2982/AP-16341818496892-2.jpg]
Len Boselovic’s Heard off the Street: John Kasich’s unreal world of education http://www.post-gazette.com A lot of people have eagerly embraced the notion that if only government, or schools, or whatever else ails us were run more like a business, things would be a whole lot better. Ohio Gov. John Kasich, the McKees Rocks native offered to American voters last year as the more reasoned Republican alternative to Donald Trump, is the latest. Despite overseeing a state that has some of the nation’s worst charter schools run by private businesses — a 2015 Akron Beacon Journal study found that Ohio charter schools misspent taxpayer money almost four times more often than any other taxpayer-funded agency — Mr. Kasich recently proposed requiring K-12 teachers to do internships with local businesses or chambers of commerce in order to be recertified. The commission — a governor’s executive workforce
________________________________
“The Dunkster’s Trick”
The Arne Duncan trick
Was “funds with strings attached”
The purpose was to stick
The schools with plan he’d hatched
115//H.R. 610 was introduced by Rep. Steve King on January 23 and was promptly referred to committee. Currently it has no co-cosponsors. Rep. Judy Chu’s representative recommends that while it sits in committee, and not to the radar of most congressional members, that everybody write their representatives expressing opposition to it.
I contacted my representative, Don Beyer, and asked him to co-sponsor the legislation, and work to pass it. Beyer is a Democrat, and although his staffer was unable to give me his position on the bill, he will oppose it.
Reblogged this on Mister Journalism: "Reading, Sharing, Discussing, Learning".
My congressman is Don Beyer (D-VA). from his website:
During January, I received hundreds of calls and letters voicing concerns about the confirmation of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. In February and March, more constituents voiced concerns about bills that would turn funding for public schools into voucher programs. I oppose such legislation, and will remain a steadfast supporter of funding and high standards for public schools, including programs for students from working class backgrounds and special needs students
Beyer attended a private school “Gonzaga” in WashDC. He is not willing to extend the same school choice to his constituents, that he enjoyed. He is a hypocrite.
I support a “slumlord” law. Every politician who is opposed to school choice, and supports the public school monopoly, should be required to send his/her children to public schools.
If they think public schools are so terrific, make them send their kids to one.
No voucher would cover the tuition at Gonzaga or any other top school.
The voucher is only enough for a poor school.
If people are willing to pay their own mone for a private or religious school, that’s ok with me.
The overwhelming majority of parents are satisfied with their public school.
No one is asserting that a school voucher (equivalent in value to the average per-pupil expenditure at an average USA public school) would meet the costs of a top preparatory school like Phillips Exeter or Choate. That is absurd.
You are wrong in asserting that a voucher would only meet the costs of a “poor school”. That is like saying that the costs extended by a state/municipality at a public school, is only paying for a poor public school.
You state you are fine with a person spending their own money to educate their child at a private/parochial school. If that is truly the case, then you should be fine with educational savings accounts, where people do exactly that. They save their own money, and use the money (without ANY input from the government) to educate their child. See https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010/09-987
How can you state that the overwhelming majority of parents are satisfied with their public school? Have you asked them? The overwhelming majority of parents are stuck in a government-monopoly school, where they have no choice. When there is no choice, you are stuck.
If people are thrilled with their government/public schools, then the entire question of school choice is moot. And if public schools are so excellent, then they have no fear from school choice, because vouchers can be redeemed at public schools as well as non-public schools.